More Resources Webcast Archive Audio Clips Photos

Secretary Spellings: Thank you very much. That was very nice. Thank you, Rick. That was very nice. I appreciate that very kind introduction. I trust you had nothing to do with the fact that the Dallas Times Herald is no longer in business. God rest its soul.

But really, thank you. That was almost as cheesy as a quesadilla, but really, I appreciate it.

Thank you all for being here. Thanks to the National Press Club for having me. I'm really delighted to be here.

As Rick said, during the last few weeks, I've made several visits to the Gulf Coast. And of course, we've all witnessed both terrible destruction and heartwarming acts of generosity. And of course, now our prayers and thoughts are with my fellow Texans as Hurricane Rita approaches in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in the Houston area, so let's keep them in our thoughts as well.

Of course, I've been so gratified by schools all across the country that are opening their doors and their hearts to displaced students, but I'm not the least bit surprised. Educators are simply showing America once again what a treasure they truly are. I met a teacher last Friday in Houston who talked about how this has been an opportunity to give back and to grow. I heard about a kindergartener in Dallas who was walking down the hall on the way to an assembly, and he doubled back towards his classroom. His teacher asked him where he was going. He said he was going to get his backpack and lunchbox. The teacher told him not to worry; it would be there when he got back. And this little 5-year-old looked up at her and said, "You just never know."

After the pictures we've all seen on television and the looks on these children's faces, I know one thing for sure: these young people need and deserve a quality education. In fact, we're having what educators call a "teachable moment." What's a teachable moment? It's an opportunity to learn from and act on the moment we're in. And Katrina is a potent reminder to all of us that every single one of our children must be given the opportunity to learn and the chance to share in the American dream. I sincerely hope the tragedy of Katrina drives this point home, that as a nation, it is our moral obligation to leave no child behind.

If Katrina shows us anything, it shows us how vulnerable we are. In fact, Tom Friedman's latest bestseller, The World Is Flat, spotlights some of our challenges for our future. Many of Friedman's points about America's waning competitiveness speak directly to education, and I want to highlight a few of these.

But there's also one passage I want to address head on. That's where Friedman chides political leaders like me for failing to "acknowledge that there is an education gap emerging and that there's an ambition gap emerging, and that we are in a quiet crisis." Well, I agree and I'll say it: there is an education gap—and we are on a mission to close it.

Business, political and education leaders are regularly sounding the alarm. Alan Greenspan has spoken at length on the need to adapt an education system to the evolving needs of our economy.

The president and CEO of Cisco Systems, John Chambers, was even more direct when he said flatly, "We are not competitive." As the international playing field becomes flatter, our students need better education and training to compete, to which I could devote a whole speech.

But let me just say this—it matters to everybody. Take a look at our high school graduation rates. Among ninth-graders, five out of 10 minority students fail to finish high school on time. Overall, three out of 10 don't finish on time. Would we tolerate three out of every 10 planes going down? Would we tolerate three out of every 10 heart surgeries failing? Then why is it okay for three out of 10 kids to drop out?

Leaving our high school students behind is not only morally unacceptable—what the president calls "the soft bigotry of low expectations"—it's also economically untenable. Studies show the staggering cost of high school dropouts. In addition to lost earnings for the individual, consider the cost to society. The one million students who drop out of high school each year cost our nation more than $260 billion in lost wages, lost taxes, lost productivity over their lifetimes. In federal dollars, that will buy you 10 years of research at the National Institutes of Health. When we lose a million students each and every year, it has a tremendous impact on our economy, and it represents the American dream denied.

So I would suggest, for this and a host of other reasons, how well our students are doing is not just an education issue; it's an economic issue, a civic issue, a social issue, a national security issue, and it's everybody's issue.

Now that I've identified the problem, the question is, what are we doing about it? With No Child Left Behind, President Bush and the Congress, in a very bipartisan way, led our nation in a historic commitment to give every child a quality education. We said to ourselves, we will close the achievement gap by 2014 across the board, with states measuring children's progress each year in reading and math, and focusing on each student and each group of students so we can discover where they need help before it's too late.

We now have proof that high standards and accountability are paying off. Scores are at all-time highs for African-American and Hispanic students, especially in the early grades. We've made more progress in the last five years than in the previous 30 combined. We are on the right track.

I see it in places like Pueblo, Colo., where its poorest schools posted a 20-point gain in fourth-grade reading scores since they started testing every year.

Superintendent Joyce Bales says, "Anybody can do what we're doing. It's easier to complain and whine than it is to do this hard work. We work hard. We work hard all the time."

In Garden Grove, Calif., a largely urban district, where 75 percent of the students do not speak English and nearly 60 percent are poor, all but two of the districts' 67 schools met or exceeded the goals of No Child Left Behind. How did they do it? Superintendent Laura Schwalm says, "We do it one kid at a time. We use No Child Left Behind to set the targets we want to hit. We align all our actions and resources to hit those targets. And we believe the kids can do it."

Every day, I am inspired by hard-working parents and policymakers and teachers and administrators like Joyce and Laura, who believe that every child can learn. Truly, those taking on this challenge are part of something historic. And I'd like to acknowledge one of those dedicated leaders whom I've asked to join us today. Donna Pasteur—stand up, Donna—who is the principal of my own eighth-grade daughter's public school, is here with us today. Thank you for being here.

While we have encouraging results for younger children, the nation's recent education report card has shown no progress for high school students in 30 years. So it's time to focus on improving high schools. That's why the president and I are supporting high school reform that focuses on reading, math and science to help more students reach the finish line on time and be ready for college or work.

We're also asking states to gauge student progress throughout high school. A recent survey by the Educational Testing Service reveals that a majority of parents, like me, believe that all students, teachers and schools should be held to the same performance standards regardless of background or race.

We know students who take rigorous courses in high school stand a far better chance of succeeding in college, but something's wrong when right here in Washington, D.C., in our own area, suburban Langley [Md.] High School offers 21 advanced placement courses—which, of course, is great—while inner-city Ballou High School offers only four. And 40 percent of high schools nationally offer no AP courses. Advanced Placement courses and other courses like that help students succeed in college and in the workforce. And the president and I want to expand those programs so that students in urban schools like Ballou have the same opportunities as children in the suburbs.

In our global economy, 80 percent of the fastest-growing jobs will require education or training beyond high school. Just this week, I announced a commission on higher education to ask some of the vital questions we're facing in that area.

For example, how can we assure that college is affordable and accessible? And, while we have a fine higher education system, some say the finest in the world, will it be adequate for our future? It's time for a vigorous public debate about higher education in America, and I look forward to the commission's findings next summer.

Here's one more thing. As you heard Rick say earlier, I'm the first mother of school-age children to hold this job, and I want to take a moment to speak to my fellow parents. One of the parts I like best about Tom Friedman's book is what he calls "the dirty little secrets." Parents must understand what he terms "the ambition gap, the numbers gap and the education gap." He says, compared with the young, energetic Indians and Chinese, too many Americans have gotten too lazy. The numbers gap refers to the fact that we're simply not producing enough engineers and scientists. The education gap means that U.S. high-tech companies are seeking employees abroad not just because they can be paid less, but because they are more skilled and more motivated. In other words, they are not following the money. They're following the brains.

So the first thing parents need to realize is that this is not the same world we grew up in. The more technology levels the playing field, the more critical postsecondary education becomes. In today's world, you need a meaningful high school education and a couple years of college to succeed as a plumber, mechanic or electrician. I agree with those who say there comes a time to toss out the Game Boy and turn off the TV, but I'll go even further. Take a look at your kid's after-school schedule this week: the swimming, soccer and football. The numbers on your child's report card should be as important as the numbers on the scoreboard.

I know a parent's job isn't easy. I've been a single mom. I work full-time. I try to pay attention, but you've got to worry about dinner, the laundry, paying bills and kids doing homework. Still, the fact remains, parents must be as interested as consumers in their children's education as they are in restaurant or travel deals. Think of all the time we've spent on the Internet trying to save $50 for a plane ticket. As parents, we have no more important task than helping our children develop academic skills and character and a little ambition if we're going to succeed in this flattening world.

I don't know if you've been to the post office lately and seen some of the new stamps, but it got me thinking. Here we have a series on our favorite and beloved Disney characters. Who doesn't love Snow White, Dopey, Mickey Mouse and Pluto, of course? Then, there's another series called "American Scientists": portraits of a famous geneticist, physicist and thermodynamicist. Name that scientist, anyone?

Today, there is no Sputnik to galvanize the nation into action, but Katrina has. The achievement gap, the education gap, the quiet crisis will cast a very long shadow over our future if we do not summon the will to stay competitive, and competitiveness begins with education. We know the cure. We can do this: high standards with measured results; high expectations; quality curriculum; great teaching; parental focus. This is our mandate and our mission. It's also the right thing to do. Our children and our country deserve no less.

Thank you very much.

Question and Answer Session
Moderated by Rick Dunham, National Press Club President

Mr. Dunham: Great. Thanks very much, Secretary Spellings.

We have a number of questions related to Katrina, but let me start with the other hurricane out there in the Gulf.

Is the Education Department making any contingency plans for children who may be evacuated from the Texas Gulf Coast if Hurricane Rita proves as devastating as is being predicted by some?

Secretary Spellings: Certainly we are. And I can say that one of the things that has caused us to focus on Katrina is it will provide models for how we deal with this across the country and now in the Gulf Coast. But absolutely, we are in close contact with our Texas friends really all the time now because of the displaced students that are there; but you bet.

Mr. Dunham: How is Katrina like Sputnik? You talked a little about that in your remarks. In what ways do you think the hurricane could galvanize the nation? And, I mean, is there a connection—Sputnik was math and science in particular. Would it be a particular subject area, or just the problems that we see in schools in general because of the displaced students?

Secretary Spellings: I think the reason that Katrina's a teachable moment, as I said, and is akin to Sputnik, is when people saw that Russian ship-spaceship—it galvanized the country. People thought, you know, we've got to do something about this. And when people see images on the Gulf Coast and see Americans suffer as they do, I mean, I think it's really a wake-up call for our country.

And while I don't necessarily think it will net out anything such as a particular subject area as the Sputnik math-science thing did, I think it will really cause us to focus on every single child. That is what "no child left behind" is about, every single American having a high-quality education. We all believe that that is the key to the American dream. When people can read and have skills and go to college and have a future, when they're educated and literate, that is what gets you access to the American dream, and that is our responsibility to these kids.

Mr. Dunham: There are a number of questions about the proposal the administration has for dealing with the situation. How far along is the Department in developing language for the Katrina budget proposal announced last week?

And there are several questions on the voucher element. Under the president's plan, will any child displaced by Hurricane Katrina be eligible to attend private school at public expense, or only those who were already enrolled in private school before the storm?

Secretary Spellings: First let me say on the tactical part of this, obviously, we're working with the Congress right now to provide technical assistance and figure out how to enact the president's proposal into law. The president—what the president has called for, really, is unprecedented for our government to do, our federal government to do—has said that whether kids or students were in private schools or public schools we had a responsibility to them; that students—that the taxpayers of Harris County, Texas, Houston, Texas, the citizens of Texas, and other places—who have warmly welcomed these students should not be penalized or punished for doing so. And so we believe that 90 percent of the instructional costs should be borne by the federal government in this case. It's unprecedented for us to provide the vast, vast majority of funding for students, be they in public schools or private schools.

But likewise, this was a hurricane that affected every family, including those in private school. And the president believes, as do I, that we should not penalize those families because they chose to select private schools. The way that this would work is that wherever students show up, those resources, those federal resources, that 90 percent, would—up to $7,500—be available for their education.

Mr. Dunham: There are two ends of the Department's response. One is what you were talking about, which is direct aid. Another that's going to come up will probably be waivers. It could be everything from the testing that would go on later in the year, to all sorts of standards, and you could have rebuilt schools. And when people start moving back to New Orleans, you have a series of problems. How are you dealing with that end of things, with the exceptions and the waivers that you might have to deal with?

Secretary Spellings: I tell my staff if I don't get a Ph.D. in public policy when this is over with, we're in the wrong business. But, obviously I'm talking a lot to the people on the ground to hear about their needs. I've been to Alabama, to Texas, I'm going to Baton Rouge tomorrow, I've been to Mississippi, I've talked to educators, I've talked to groups of superintendents who were in very regular contact with Chris Dougherty, who's leading my effort at the Department, with the chief state school officers, so that we can really get a handle on what the issues are. So the first thing is we're learning, you know, what's going on.

Secondly, I would say that there are some additional authorities that are going to be needed in this unprecedented sort of situation. And I can give you lots of examples of what those are. But, you know, trust me, you know, we don't have laws on the books that can accommodate this sort of hurricane.

I would say that I still believe that what we owe these children, whether they're in Texas public schools or Louisiana public schools, the opportunity for a great education. And I don't think we should write off this academic year for them or for their new fellow students that they're hooking up with in other states. And, of course, I want to be reasonable and flexible and understanding with the situations, with the trauma and so forth that's going on, but I also think, and I know, that the last thing we need to do is write off these kids. And so I believe that we'll get to a good place with the school community as well as with the Congress as we maneuver through the waivers.

Mr. Dunham: You spoke of the trauma. A lot of students who have been displaced need emergency crisis counseling. Is that a role that the Department can play? Is the Department doing anything, either directly or helping the school districts around the country that have the students?

Secretary Spellings: We absolutely are. In fact, we have something called Project Serve, about $7 million worth of resources that we're making available in grants to the most affected areas. And likewise, we have pulled together all the national experts from the Veterans Administration, HHS, other places so that we can create materials that can be distributed, training sessions and the like, so that we can get this information out to teachers who are dealing with these kids every day.

In fact, that's one of the things that I've heard so much as I've gone around the Gulf Coast area. One teacher in Mississippi told me, "I don't know what to do but to love them." And they have a lot of questions. Of course, they want to do right, want to do their best. But I think this is not in their normal experience. And so yes, we do have a role to provide, additional help and expertise for this situation.

Mr. Dunham: The Business Week reporter in me wants to know what role you see for the private sector in helping out with the schools in the wake of the hurricane. And someone in the audience asked, "What evidence do you have that public schools need help from the private sector in absorbing students who fled from Katrina?"

Secretary Spellings: Well, just like all Americans, the corporate community, the private sector is pouring out a lot of love and resources and assistance to the school community. We created a part of our Web site called "Hurricane Help for Schools." The first lady has taped a public service announcement for us to urge people to help the school community. And we have Wal-Mart literally giving free school supplies to everyone in Harris County. We have Target, lots and lots of very significant contributions into the school community. We have already a hundred matches on the Hurricane Help for Schools.

I think over time different needs are going to net out. We're already seeing along the Gulf Coast, in Mississippi and Louisiana in particular, the need for strategic planning, master planning, the sorts of things that the private sector knows how to do well. So I'm very excited to see them taking up such an active role in this crisis and very grateful to them.

Mr. Dunham: I'm going to try to drag you into a couple of the political controversies on Katrina here. One has to do with the move by some on the Hill to create spending offsets for any additional spending. Obviously, the Department is going to be spending a whole lot more to cover these costs. Are you anticipating any offsets within your Department? Are you going to get involved in the political debate on Capitol Hill of whether there should be any offsets?

Secretary Spellings: Clearly the process that we are engaged in with the Congress is one of negotiating, both on the policy side and, as we get to where we need to be, on resources. What I do know is that expediency is of the essence; that the schools do need resources. They have set their tax rates; they don't have the ability to go out and access, in Houston's case, millions and millions of dollars to accommodate tens of thousands of kids. So I'm confident that the Congress will see the need to do this.

But obviously there are things in the Department of Education's budget and in the federal government generally that the president has called for either trimming or eliminating. We have some programs in our own budget that are not as effective as they could be, that are a better way to do business and so forth. And so those things I'm sure will be on the table as we negotiate with Congress.

But I think at the end of the day I'm really confident that the schools will be adequately funded, and I think that's the right and important thing to do.

Mr. Dunham: Is there any way of avoiding the debate over vouchers, federal money that would go to private or religious schools, because of the nature of the situation and all the students being displaced and needing to enroll in schools right now? Is there any way that you can avoid that? Is it a train wreck that is inevitable in the next couple of weeks?

Secretary Spellings: A number of leaders have said, and I certainly concur, that this is not the time to provoke a giant national voucher program. The president has said that. But it is appropriate for us to provide relief and aid to families who have been hurt by this incident, wherever they are.

And so, this is a temporary situation. This is a one-year relief /aid package. It's going to be narrowly focused, instructionally directed and so forth. And my hope is that we'll be able to negotiate with the Congress to get assistance to these families.

I think many people around the country do not appreciate the important role—do not understand maybe is the better word to use—that private schools, especially Catholic schools, played in New Orleans. More than 30,000 kids attended Catholic schools, some number greater than that in other private schools, and then about 52,000 kids in the New Orleans public schools.

So this is a huge community, and particularly down in that area. And I think members of the Congress traveled to the community. I met a teacher who was a teacher in a Catholic school, had his kids in Catholic schools, was a physics teacher, African-American male physics teacher, and he was at this education roundtable. He got about five job offers while I was sitting there. So I'm confident he'll be employed soon.

But he told the story of this and how many, many working-class families like him, I think he told me, spend $4,000 or $5,000 in tuition. This is not $20,000-private schools. It's a different kind of situation down there than many people think about when they think about private education. And so I think the Congress will get a feel for that, and I'm confident at the end of the day that we'll have aid available for those families.

Mr. Dunham: One last Katrina-related question. One of the education reporters here wants to know if there's any role that distance learning has played or could play in the relief effort dealing with children from New Orleans who are all over the country.

Secretary Spellings: Bill, did you ask that question? We were talking about that up here. Sure, it can. In fact, I've already heard some things where kids who have 21 credits—it takes 21 credits to graduate from high school in Louisiana, 24 credits in Texas—obviously, it's going to be hard for those children to make them up or students to make them up and get a Texas high school diploma. There are obviously different kinds of curriculum standards and so forth.

So the Texans are committed to trying to find ways that people, those students, can get a Louisiana diploma. That's going to take some technological innovation, I think. I've also talked to folks in the higher ed community; they're talking about online partnering. The president of Loyola University told me this morning that they're basically considering this kind of a "semester abroad," for operational purposes. And if you're going from Louisiana to Chicago, it might feel like that, actually.

But sure, I do. I think there are ways that technology can help us bridge this gap and get these children where they need to be.

Mr. Dunham: There are a number of questions about No Child Left Behind. One person asks: Many educators say they have trouble showing continuous improvement if every year they get new immigrants who arrive far behind everyone else. What is the Department of Education doing about this? And it's sort of an apples and oranges kind of situation if the demographics or the students change each year. Is there any way that you can take that into account?

Secretary Spellings: The first thing I would say is that when I first was confirmed, I heard about three issues: the need to recognize progress that's being made, the issues related to special education students, and issues related to non-English speakers. But I first want to say, in the absence of No Child Left Behind, I'm not sure we'd be having these conversations about how best to serve and how to get students on grade level and so forth. And so I think the fact that this is provoking a lot of work, a lot of discussion and a lot of attention for those students is right and appropriate. So I've convened groups of experts and practitioners to kind of think through some of these issues.

But I do think we need to get much smarter, much more sophisticated and much more able to accelerate learning, to address the needs of non-English speakers and to put them on a course for grade-level proficiency. That's the first thing I'd say.

Secondly, I think we're seeing some models around the country, some places that have demonstrated that they've cracked the code. The law, No Child Left Behind, does provide a safe harbor mechanism where progress is acknowledged and factored into the rating system. So I do think it's an issue, but I think we'll work through it.

Mr. Dunham: When we talked earlier in the year, you said you were going to be doing a lot of listening in your first few months, particularly from districts and education officials who had questions or complaints about No Child Left Behind. Now that you've had a chance to listen for a while, I was wondering what you've heard and what, if anything, the Education Department is doing on the flexibility end, which is something you had talked about as an option but you wanted to listen before you decided how you were—how we're going to approach it.

Secretary Spellings: We've done a lot of things, and I've—as you said, Rick—had the opportunity to work in the state legislative environment. I've worked on behalf of local school boards and now at the federal level, and I think I do have some understanding about what people wrestle with at each of those—in each of those policy arenas. And I have respect for that. So I understand that it's a lot easier for me to talk about big goals and so forth, but that the hard work of closing the achievement gap is going on in classrooms all across America with teachers and sound curriculum and paying attention to data and so on. I certainly don't mean to minimize that at all. But I have been very responsive on a few of the issues that I've heard a lot about; first, special education. This law passed about three and a half years ago. We know a lot more because we've focused on it like a laser in the last three and a half years about who these kids are, their needs, the range of instructional strategies, the kinds of assessments that are appropriate, just a whole lot of focus that's gone on over the last three and a half years. And one of the things that I did in conjunction and consultation with these experts in the field is have an understanding.

There's probably about 2 percent of the students, an additional 2 percent of the students who can meet the standards, but are going to take more time, different strategies, different assessments to get to the finish line. The Department had previously said there's 1 percent of the students that are so profoundly and severely disabled that they in fact should not be part of the accountability system. Now, I've said there's probably another 2 percent that can get there, but are going to need a little different approach.

And I think as we learn, I've been involved in public policy for a long time, and it's an organic process. Nobody I know has ever passed a perfect law. We need to learn from our experience. We need to learn from the research as it develops, and we need to use our best information that we have available at the time to make policy. That's one example.

Second—and I see my friend Mike Casserly from the Council of the Great City Schools over there—the Department had previously a policy that said that districts in need of improvement could not offer supplemental services, tutoring services. The law also provides that the sanctions—as educators consider them—the triggering of school-choice options, occur first in public schools, so a parent has an option to transfer his or her child to a public school first and then access supplemental services. And many in the education community have observed that that ought to be flipped. They ought to first get tutoring and then have the option for public school choice.

So in those two cases, I have waived provisions of the rules that are on the books to allow us to test some theories, to do some pilots. I'm testing the "district in need of improvement theory" in Chicago with strong accountability to make sure that we get better results. My goal obviously is to have more kids get help. More kids that need help get it. We have two million children eligible for supplemental services in our country and about 200,000—about 10 percent of them—getting it. So the system's not working. I have some pilot programs in Virginia that are testing the theory of does it make more sense to access supplemental services before public school choice.

I think that Congress is going to look to me as we go into reauthorization to provide some information about what's effective, what's not, what are ways that can provide more options, more access to educational services for all kids. And so we don't need to be hardheaded about it. We need to be smart and strategic, test some theories, create data, hold those pilot sites accountable for improved student achievement and see where we are within a year.

Mr. Dunham: Okay. There are several questions that have to do with colleges and preparation for higher education. One person says that American colleges are the most expensive in the world. How can our kids compete in the world if they have to work full-time or join the National Guard to—or take six or eight years—to get a college degree? Can you talk a little about the costs of colleges, and the affordability for average Americans?

Secretary Spellings: I just sent my oldest daughter off to college at a private school, and, it's—it's unbelievable. I'm in the public sector you know, as you all have heard, and it's really amazing how much higher education costs. And obviously, that's not true everywhere. I mean, I do think people can access higher education in affordable ways: through community colleges, through state institutions and so forth. And that's right and appropriate.

I do not believe that economics ought to be a barrier to a qualified kid attending college. I talk about how the federal government is part of the problem. We have 60 Web sites, 60 different Web sites that you can access for information on financial aid. We have about a dozen toll-free numbers—a very user-friendly kind of process. And that's why I've asked this commission to look at these things and work on this and figure out what can we do better, how can we be more strategic? About a third of the dollars in higher education come from the federal government, compared to 8 to 10 percent in K through 12. And my question is, are we investing it wisely and well and strategically? To what end? Those sorts of things.

So I've convened a bipartisan group. My friend, the former governor of North Carolina, Jim Hunt, will be serving. Charles Miller, who chaired the University of Texas governing board will be the chairman. I have educators—Chuck Vest from MIT; private-sector folks on the commission—to really take a hard look at some of the things that are before us.

I think the good news is Americans know and believe that higher education will set you on the course for the American dream. And that's great. Kids know that. The bad news is too few of them have the skills to access it and be successful. So, we have work.

Mr. Dunham: On higher education, do you think colleges should be subject to an accountability mechanism like the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or something else, to report average scores for groups of schools, to have some sort of accountability the same way as you suggested for K through 12?

Secretary Spellings: I don't know yet. One thing I do know is that we—I think public policymakers, whether at the state level or at the federal level, or even in a governing board—they lack information to figure out what to do. And so I think the first thing we have to do is start with information before we start with accountability: what do we know, who's going to college—we can tell you at the federal government level almost everything you want to know about a first-time, full-time, degree-seeking, nontransfer student, which is, that fewer and fewer students go to college—it is getting down to half.

We are a nation of lifelong learners and, we just need to know who's our customer, how well are we doing, what are the productivity indicators, whether you're on a governing board, whether you're in the federal government, or whether you're at the state level. These are things that people want to know. I can't think of any other area of public policy where we really don't have much information to act on.

Mr. Dunham: Middle schools, or, I guess, junior high when we were in school, seem to be the Waterloo of many American students. What can we do to stop the drop-off in achievement at that level, and should we go and look at that kind of reform next before we would do the secondary school?

Secretary Spellings: Middle schools are a big part of No Child Left Behind already. As I've mentioned, the assessment provisions go through grade 8, so it's grades 3 through 8, and, high school is largely untouched by the accountability measurement, disaggregation-of-data sort of focus. So, middle schools really are part of No Child Left Behind.

One of the things I do think that's an area of focus that we need to work on, I think some of which is related to reading skills, reading fluency, reading proficiency, that students need to continue to accelerate those skills as they take more challenging course work. Back to we don't have much information about high schools. Need some data there too.

We have some hunches about why kids drop out. One of them is, not enough skill to do high school-level work, lack of engagement in things that kids are interested in, and so forth. So a variety of reasons. But, I think focusing on basic skills—reading, math, and so forth—has got to be part of the recipe for reform.

Mr. Dunham: My niece and nephews have attended an all-year school in Arlington, [Va.], Barcroft Elementary. Someone here is asking about the number of hours American students spend in school. Should American schools go to a six-week summer break like the rest of the world? Is year-round schooling a better idea? Do you think that students need to spend more time in the classroom than they do right now?

Secretary Spellings: I think this is one of the next big things, because like your mother asked you, "How do you get to Carnegie Hall?" You know, "Practice, practice, practice." And the rest of the world does work harder, if you want to call it that, than we do as far as number of instructional days, typically. So I think the American public wants to know that they are getting their money's worth for the 175 to 185 days that they're paying for now; that we are maximizing that investment. So I think that's an important, appropriate question to ask.

But I do think that. In fact, I talked to Governor Riley in Alabama. They're trying to increase the school year by five or 10 days. They have one of the shortest school years down there. I'm sure he probably wouldn't want me to advertise that. But I think he's on the right track to try to add more, what educators call "time on task."

The other thing that I think we're seeing around the country really is an understanding that students are going to progress at different paces, and instruction that's more individualized; that some children, some students are going to need 10 months to get the material; some people will get it in seven. And so a more competency-based approach. This is what supplemental services is, essentially. This is what KIPP Academy and the charter school community do; they spend more time with kids who need it getting basic skills and getting to proficiency levels. They go till 5:00 or 6:00 at night; they go for half a day on Saturday, and they go throughout the summer. It's not terribly fancy or sophisticated, but it's working harder, working until you get to proficiency. And so I think we're seeing some of that individualization happen around the country in education circles.

Mr. Dunham: We may be getting to the lightning round with the—

Secretary Spellings: Doggone it.

Mr. Dunham: —the questions where the stakes are higher!

One reporter wants to know: Can you tell us categorically today that intelligent design is not an established academic discipline that should be taught in our public schools? You can answer in one sentence or less.

Secretary Spellings: Local control.

Mr. Dunham: Well, that was one sentence or less!

Secretary Spellings: Two words. It's Double Jeopardy.

Mr. Dunham: This week the Department of Education's Office of Inspector General reported that media relations firms, advocacy groups and other private companies received nearly $5 million in grants to covertly galvanize for federal No Child Left Behind. What steps is the Department of Education taking to ensure this does not happen again—that is, if there's anything wrong with it.

Secretary Spellings: One of the first things that I had the opportunity to address when I became secretary was all of the issues relating to Armstrong Williams and communications, and so forth. And of course, with a law of this magnitude that has this far of a reach with parents and communities, it's appropriate that people understand what it is and that we communicate to them, to the school community, to teachers, to parents, and so forth. But, of course, we need to do that within the boundaries of the law, absolutely. And I have worked very closely with our inspector general on that.

I embraced every single recommendation that he made to me about staff training, about working with these various contractors, and so forth, to make sure that the proper disclosures were made. And we are implementing the inspector general's recommendations.

I think, frankly, this is overstated. We did not find, and he did not find, that there had been that much abuse. I mean, he looked at every single contract, and, in fact, the proper disclosures had for the most part been made. But certainly, there's nobody who cares about the credibility of the Department of Education more than I do. And this law is right. It's a good law. It's a great policy. It's good for our country, and it can stand on its own.

Mr. Dunham: What progress is being made in revising Title IX provisions on single-gender education programs in schools?

Secretary Spellings: Well, I don't know if the person means K-12 schools.

One of the things about Title IX is we have had what has been understood particularly in the higher-end community to be a quota system. And Title IX actually provides three tests to meet the requirements of Title IX with respect to opportunity for usually women and girls. I'm a mother of two daughters. I'm a real live soccer mom. I'm obviously a woman myself, so I care about this. I care about opportunities for girls.

And one of the things we need to do is make sure that institutions around the country know how they can comply with the law. And the Congress provided three ways to meet the test of compliance with Title IX, and there had been a lot of reliance, really, only on one part of it, the part that was construed to be more of a quota-type system. But interest is certainly an indicator that ought to be looked at, and can be looked at. And so we provided guidance early in the administration to provide technical assistance and information about how schools could better comply with this. Higher ed institutions, of course, have to withstand litigation as they meet the requirements of Title IX. They have to withstand pressure from their communities. And I don't think the higher ed community weighs into Title IX issues lightly at all. I think they're very committed—certainly the people that I interact with—to provide opportunity for all students.

Mr. Dunham: All right.

Why do you think that the president's high school reform proposals have run into the resistance that they have on Capitol Hill?

And what's the difference between No Child Left Behind, which moved through pretty quickly, and the efforts that you've put forward this year?

Secretary Spellings: The first thing I would say is, while the Congress has maybe been a little reluctant, I'm very encouraged by the fact that governors all around the country—smart governors—know that the people who are going to get the jobs are the ones that have the most educated workforces, and they are focusing on high school reform in large measure. From Governor Warner, my own governor in Virginia, whom I've had an eventwith; Governor Taft in Ohio; Governor Owens in Colorado—I've been to lots of places, stood with a lot of governors talking about high school reform. The National Governors Association has embraced a vigorous reform agenda, so this is really getting seeded around the country by governors.

Our primary federal investment in high school is in vocational education. And some vocational education is well done, high standards, rooted in academic principles, and a rigorous curriculum. And some is not. And when we have the numbers that we have—you heard me talk about the high school statistics—five out of 10 minority kids not getting out of high school—it makes we wonder, are our high school investments from the federal level getting the results we'd like to see?

And so I think the facts are there. And I'm going to use forums like this to frame the problem, and I'm very confident that eventually they'll come onboard.

Mr. Dunham: We have a lot of newspaper reporters here today. Someone wants to know what you think of the newspaper as curriculum programs in schools. Are they any good, and how can they be improved?

Secretary Spellings: I should ask my child's principal, Donna, to talk about that. She knows more about that kind of tactical stuff than I would.

I think they're certainly great tools. They're kind of ancillary to curriculum standards and so forth. I think they can provide students a lot of "teachable moment" sort of information. So I think they're important. I see them used a lot around the country.

But it's a good thing to do. I don't think we have a lot of accountability or measurement or data about the effectiveness of that sort of effort versus other things that are done in classrooms. But I certainly think they're worth doing. And I certainly think the newspaper community has a keen interest in making sure that students are literate.

Mr. Dunham: That's true. And remember that you read on paper, not necessarily in front of a screen every day.

Before I ask the final question, I want to make a presentation. We have a certificate of appreciation and the National Press Club mug.

Secretary Spellings: Wow! I mean, Wow!

Mr. Dunham: So now we're going to go back to the history books, to the 1981 Capitol press crib book here.

Secretary Spellings: At least he was kind enough not to do this first.

Mr. Dunham: We have, as all media has, Margaret's name misspelled, but there she is. And then the other baby-faced kid, Senator Bentsen's press secretary, labeled the Baby-Faced Assassin, over on the right there.

So my last question is, back in 1981, what were your career aspirations? And what would you have said to someone if we were in the Texas House chamber and someone had said that 24 years later you were going to be in the Cabinet of the president as secretary of education?

Secretary Spellings: Of course I would have said, "Insanity. Preposterous." But anyway, here I am. We were talking about this, Greg and I, about how I have these "pinch me" moments still; that what in the heck is Margaret Dudar from Sharpstown High School doing here? But I think I would just say I believe that it's good to have people like me in government. It's stunning to me the eighth secretary of education is the first mother with school children to have this job. I'm living it every day, I see it come home in my backpack, and so on. So it's an honor, a thrill, and I'm glad to be here.

####